Forum: Ruby Ruby text editor for beginner

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
b1_ _. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 16:37
I'm looking for a simple text editor for Ruby to work under WinXP SP2.

Must have:

- syntax colouring (of course)
- an incorporated window that shows your code working, even when your
code requires gets input
- option to turn background to black and adjust colours accordingly
(would be nice to have a "convert to black" button, or even better,
default black background).

Could have:
- folder navigation and "projects"
- ability to open more than one Ruby file with tabs
- autocompletion of code

I've tried Scite but couldn't get the incorporated code working window
working when your code required input. I was directed to a fix which I
tried but the fix did not fix it. There's was no option to turn the
background to black anyway, so I abandoned it.

I tried FreeRIDE. Had the option to turn the background to black, but no
black background convert button. Had multifile open tabs. Had folder
navigation and projects capabilities. Had a code working window, but I
couldn't get this one working either. Went to their website and there
was mention of problems in windows - supposed to work fine in Linux
though. I liked FreeRIDE but one of my top 3 requirements was broke so
I've put it aside.

Looked at vim and emacs through some nice screencasts. A little too
complicated for my purpose at this early stage of my Ruby career. I can
see myself ending up using either of these eventually though.

Found Arachno and Ruby in Steel, but alas I don't own Visual Basic and
won't be buying it just to run Ruby code.

What's left? Any simple text editor for Ruby that meets my 3 must have
requirements?
Reid T. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 16:46
(Received via mailing list)
Shawn Wa... wrote:
>
> I tried FreeRIDE. Had the option to turn the background to black, but no
>
> Found Arachno and Ruby in Steel, but alas I don't own Visual Basic and
> won't be buying it just to run Ruby code.
>
> What's left? Any simple text editor for Ruby that meets my 3 must have
> requirements?
>
>
see http://homepage2.nifty.com/sakazuki/rde_en/index.html
Mat S. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 16:49
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 18, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Shawn Wa... wrote:
>
> Could have:
> - folder navigation and "projects"
> - ability to open more than one Ruby file with tabs
> - autocompletion of code
>
> What's left? Any simple text editor for Ruby that meets my 3 must have
> requirements?

While not a text editor, I'd recommend eclipse.  It's default scheme
is blank on white, but you can configure it.  If you download
RadRails, it'll come with everything you need to do Ruby projects as
well.  It lacks auto completion, but has everything else you're
looking for.  It even handles subversion and unit testing, which
you'll probably get into once your projects grow a little larger.
-Mat
b1_ _. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 17:07
Can you both confirm (ie used yourself) that RDE and Eclipse can execute
Ruby code from within the program if on WinXP SP2? FreeRIDE and Scite
claimed they could and they both couldn't, or I couldn't get them
working anyway.

They look good to me. The first one I try that has my top 3 I'm using.
Drew O. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 17:12
Shawn W_ wrote:
> Can you both confirm (ie used yourself) that RDE and Eclipse can execute
> Ruby code from within the program if on WinXP SP2? FreeRIDE and Scite
> claimed they could and they both couldn't, or I couldn't get them
> working anyway.
>
> They look good to me. The first one I try that has my top 3 I'm using.

Eclipse with RDT can indeed execute code as long as you point it at the
interpreter. However, there is a weird syncing issue with I/O display
that you have to fix. It's one line of code and explained on the RDT
website.
Reid T. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 17:25
(Received via mailing list)
Shawn W_ wrote:
> Can you both confirm (ie used yourself) that RDE and Eclipse can execute
> Ruby code from within the program if on WinXP SP2? FreeRIDE and Scite
> claimed they could and they both couldn't, or I couldn't get them
> working anyway.
>
> They look good to me. The first one I try that has my top 3 I'm using.
>
>
>
RDE does
Reid T. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 17:36
(Received via mailing list)
Reid T. wrote:
> RDE does
>
Eclipse is nice.  It is LARGE.  It offers the option of multiple
languages and infinite configuration.  It is a JAVA application.  All of
these are great if you want/need them.  If you don't they can be a PITA.

RDT is nice.  It is small.  Not sure if it does langs other than ruby.
I'm pretty much 99% VIM.  I've used and will prob continue to use RDE
and Eclipse for various purposes at various times ( at various times I
want/need various capabilities ).  If you're currently just interested
in RUBY and want a small, quick IDE, I suggest giving RDE a run.

Screenshots of both ides are at their respective sites.
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 18:13
(Received via mailing list)
Reid T. wrote:
>>>
> times I want/need various capabilities ).  If you're currently just
> interested in RUBY and want a small, quick IDE, I suggest giving RDE a
> run.
> Screenshots of both ides are at their respective sites.
>
>
I'm pretty impressed with KDevelop on the Linux platform. I don't know
any reason why it couldn't be made to work on a Mac, but I don't know
about Windows. A couple of years ago I saw a (ghastly slow and unusable)
port of KDE to Cygwin, so I suppose it's *possible* to run KDevelop
under Cygwin.

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
Jeff K. (Guest)
on 2007-01-18 20:14
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/18/07, Shawn Wa... <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
> What's left? Any simple text editor for Ruby that meets my 3 must have
> requirements?
>


Well, I have only been coding Ruby a short time now and I use Komodo
from
Active State.  It supports Ruby as well as PHP, Python, Perl, and
Tcl/Tk.
So far have been quite pleased so far with it.

Regards,

jlk
Suraj K. (Guest)
on 2007-01-19 06:31
Shawn W_ wrote:
> Looked at vim and emacs through some nice screencasts. A little too
> complicated for my purpose at this early stage of my Ruby career. I can
> see myself ending up using either of these eventually though.

Have a look at VimMate before going to Vim. It's just a wrapper around
Vim that provides a nice console and file management GUI. Plain, simple,
works for me ;)

> What's left? Any simple text editor for Ruby that meets my 3 must have
> requirements?

How about jEdit with:

* RubyPlugin

http://rubyjedit.org/

* EditorScheme plugin (use dark color schemes: dessert, dark brine,
etc.)

see example: http://www.eadz.co.nz/blog/article/ruby-rails-jedit.html

* SuperAbbrevs plugin (just like the famous TextMate you see in Rails
screen casts):

http://www.ifakedit.com/log/2006/02/19/jedit-tutor...

http://synthesis.sbecker.net/articles/2006/03/20/j...

With these awesome plugins, I feel jEdit is the equivalent of TextMate
that's made for the rest of us. ;)
Nathan S. (Guest)
on 2007-01-19 17:30
(Received via mailing list)
You said "for beginner", so I guess Vim is out. I like Textpad (
www.textpad.com) (it's shareware.) There are Ruby syntax definition
files
available, and you can set up Tools so you can do a CTRL-1 and run the
program your editing in a separate tab. It's got everything you asked
for (I
think) except autocompletion and I don't think the output window lets
you
input, but that could be easy to work around.

Nate
Hendrik Volkmer (Guest)
on 2007-01-19 17:30
(Received via mailing list)
Mat S. schrieb:
> While not a text editor, I'd recommend eclipse.  It's default scheme
> is blank on white, but you can configure it.  If you download
> RadRails, it'll come with everything you need to do Ruby projects as
> well.
There's a nice TextMate-style theme for RadRails if you like the colors:
http://drnicwilliams.com/2006/08/08/textmate-theme...
> It lacks auto completion, but has everything else you're looking for.
What do you mean by "auto completion"? Defining templates and using
Ctrl+Space works fine. So you could type
de<Ctrl+Space>method_name

and end up with

def method_name
  <cursor goes here>
end

Completion for variable names etc. is supposed to work, too but somehow
it hasn't worked for me so far (maybe I'll need to upgrade to a newer
version...).
> It even handles subversion and unit testing, which you'll probably get
> into once your projects grow a little larger.
I second that. The subversion integration is quite good and it's nice to
see the green unit test bar and the Ctrl+F11 shortcut makes it easy to
repeatedly run tests.

Hendrik
b1_ _. (Guest)
on 2007-01-20 04:35
I've tried RDE but once again run code window doesn't work. This is the
program that is breaking all the editors:

-----------------------------------
puts 'LEAP YEAR CALCULATOR'
puts 'Enter the start year'
startyear = gets.chomp.to_i
puts ' '
puts 'Enter the end year'
endyear = gets.chomp.to_i
puts ' '
puts 'The leap years between the years you have entered are:'

while startyear <= endyear
  if startyear%4 == 0 and startyear%100 != 0 or startyear%400 == 0
#using modulus method %, which returns the remainder when the first
number is divided by the second
#using the == sign (is this equal), which is different from the = sign
(which is an assigning one to the other)
  puts startyear
  end
  startyear = startyear + 1
end
-----------------------------------

This short program requires you to enter two years and then it outputs
all the leapyears between them. After hitting F5 in RDE for the above
code I get:

1985
2006
LEAP YEAR CALCULATOR
Enter the start year

Enter the end year

The leap years between the years you have entered are:
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004

The dates are entered before the puts statements? The prompt in the code
working pane immediately after hitting F5 is [EOF], not LEAP YEAR
CALCULATOR Enter the start year? Dunno what [EOF] means?

It's more than likely I'm doing something wrong here but straight out of
the box RDE does not execute gets and puts correctly, or at least not in
the right order.

Can anyone test the above code and tell me it works in their Ruby editor
as it would from the dos prompt with c:\ruby program.rb?

RDE looks similar to FreeRIDE. Has all the same stuff and the same
shortfalls. Both programs do not allow you to change all the panes to a
black background, not just the code edit window. If this is the case it
defeats the purpose of having a black background because a half white
half black screen is more annoying than an all white screen. The purpose
of a black screen is to ease the glare on the eyes. RDE does not have an
"convert to black background" button, but neither has any editor I've
come across so far.

I'm more than happy to be corrected on any of these points - I am a
newbie. In fact I want to be corrected becuase if I'm wrong I've found
my editor.
b1_ _. (Guest)
on 2007-01-20 04:48
Drew O. wrote:
> Eclipse with RDT can indeed execute code as long as you point it at the
> interpreter. However, there is a weird syncing issue with I/O display
> that you have to fix. It's one line of code and explained on the RDT
> website.

This is similar to what I had to do to get Scite's program running pane
working. One line of code into the Ruby configuration file. I did that
for that program and it didn't work for me.

My logic is that if I have to configure these simple Ruby editors then I
might as well just bite the bullet and learn vim or emacs. I'm starting
to think this is what I'm going to have to do to get everything exactly
as I want it, it's just I have my doubts I will be able to with my
limited Ruby knowledge. Don't you need to know Ruby syntax and some of
the ins and outs of setting up the Ruby interpreter to use those
editors?

On second thoughts, stuff it, I'll configure anything on any program. I
just want my top 3 requirements any way I can get them.
Suraj K. (Guest)
on 2007-01-20 05:11
Shawn W_ wrote:
> Drew O. wrote:
>> Eclipse with RDT can indeed execute code as long as you point it at the
>> interpreter. However, there is a weird syncing issue with I/O display
>> that you have to fix. It's one line of code and explained on the RDT
>> website.
>
> This is similar to what I had to do to get Scite's program running pane
> working. One line of code into the Ruby configuration file. I did that
> for that program and it didn't work for me.

The console used by most of these editors (except VimMate, which embeds
gnome-terminal) is not a true terminal emulator. So you were having
problems because your script's output was being buffered, perhaps
excessively, by the text editor's console.

When I add the following line to the top of your program, it works fine
in the text editor's console.

  STDOUT.sync = true  # disable output buffering

Also, might I recommend that you consistently indent your code to
indicate logical structure (i.e. stuff within the if & while statements
should appear "within" them).

Here is a screen shot of the fixed version of your program in jEdit:

  http://rubyurl.com/aVP
Giles B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 00:48
(Received via mailing list)
I have a theory about this.

My theory is that newbies ask for an IDE because they don't understand
irb.

If you're a newbie and you want an IDE, my advice is to give it up
entirely and instead learn irb.

You can get syntax coloring in irb with Wirble, and if you're using
Rails, which many many newbies are, script/console is a Rails extended
version of irb, which is very very good.
Giles B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 00:48
(Received via mailing list)
Sorry, "learn irb" doesn't really make sense, I mean "use irb."
Jonathan A. (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 07:10
Giles B. wrote:
> I have a theory about this.
>
> My theory is that newbies ask for an IDE because they don't understand
> irb.
>

I'm willing to bet that most of them don't understand how to effectively
use a REPL loop, and that's fine if you look at it from their
perspective.

Some people really, really don't like the idea of coding interactively.
They want to see their whole program as a file. This gives them the
assurance that what is before them is exactly what will be in memory,
with no lingering garbage from previously executed commands.

There is also the familiarity aspects. People coming from a non-REPL
background often look at it and ask, "Ok, now how do I save my program?"
or "Do I really have to retype my last 30 lines to fix that little bug
in method foo?". Having cut my teeth on GW-BASIC, I personally see it as
a step backwards.

Why? Because with BASIC I could at least decide if the statements I
entered would be run immediately or saved for latter. This was done by
optionally prefixing them with line numbers. With line numbers, I can
easily list everything I have already entered and go back and edit
lines. I can even write the beginning and end of a block before I filled
in the details.

For many people, there is no way to convince them that REPL systems like
irb is anything more than a toy. You make think its great, but these
people are not going to listen to you. If you try to force them, then
they will just assume Ruby is a toy as well. They will think, "Ruby must
be a toy, is doesn't even have a decent IDE."

So let them have their IDE. Once they have time to play with the
language, the ones who want to learn REPL will pick irb. And the ones
that are unwilling to learn it will be perfectly happy using Ruby
without it.

Jonathan
b1_ _. (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 15:18
Suraj K. wrote:
> The console used by most of these editors (except VimMate, which embeds
> gnome-terminal) is not a true terminal emulator. So you were having
> problems because your script's output was being buffered, perhaps
> excessively, by the text editor's console.
>
> When I add the following line to the top of your program, it works fine
> in the text editor's console.
>
>   STDOUT.sync = true  # disable output buffering
>


Okay, thx. I added that line and it worked fine, so there's nothing
wrong with RDE. Also worked for Scite. Didn't work for FreeRIDE tho. So
far I've found that that was the only program that was having problems,
it just happened to be the first one I tried.

I'll stick with RDE for now - no more time, just want to get on with it.
I'm running through some tutorials and its a lot faster in RDE than
using IRB from the DOS console and a standard text editor. If I want the
perfect editor I guess I'll just have to learn to program my own.
bbiker (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 21:55
(Received via mailing list)
Giles B. wrote:
>
Question: How do you use wirble with win32 machine?
The wirble documentation talks about .irbrc file which obviously  I do
not have

ruby 1.8.5 (2006-08-25) [i386-mswin32]
irb 0.9.5(05/04/13)

Thank you for any assistance you may offer.
Giles B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 23:37
(Received via mailing list)
well, if you've installed the gem, I think you can do it just by
entering a few commands:

# load libraries
require 'rubygems'
require 'wirble'

# start wirble (with color)
Wirble.init
Wirble.colorize

obviously that's non-optimal, though, because it won't automatically
load every time. I honestly don't know how irb works on Windows boxes,
I have one but the irb on it is built into FreeRide or something. you
can probably use those commands to get started, though.
Wilson B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 23:37
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/21/07, bbiker <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > version of irb, which is very very good.
> >
>
> Question: How do you use wirble with win32 machine?
> The wirble documentation talks about .irbrc file which obviously  I do
> not have
>
> ruby 1.8.5 (2006-08-25) [i386-mswin32]
> irb 0.9.5(05/04/13)
>

You can't. Not because you can't have a .irbrc file (You just need to
specify a directory in the HOME environment variable, and put it
there).. but because Microsoft got rid of color support in the command
prompt.
You could disable color in wirble and make it work though, I suspect.
dean (Guest)
on 2007-01-21 23:57
(Received via mailing list)
you can InType http://intype.info/home/index.php
is still in alpha but is has lots of the funcionality of texmate

cheers,
d
Helder R. (Guest)
on 2007-01-22 04:20
(Received via mailing list)
Jonathan A. wrote:
>
> I'm willing to bet that most of them don't understand how to effectively
> use a REPL loop, and that's fine if you look at it from their
> perspective.

That's exactly right. I'm good using REPL for simple scripting, but I
can't think of a good way to use it for bigger things. Could you point
me (us) out some reading on how to use it for serious development?

> There is also the familiarity aspects. People coming from a non-REPL
> background often look at it and ask, "Ok, now how do I save my program?"
> or "Do I really have to retype my last 30 lines to fix that little bug
> in method foo?".

Those are the very first questions that come to my mind, indeed. What
are the answers?


Cheers,

Helder
James G. (Guest)
on 2007-01-22 05:13
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 21, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Helder R. wrote:

> Jonathan A. wrote:
>>
>> I'm willing to bet that most of them don't understand how to
>> effectively
>> use a REPL loop, and that's fine if you look at it from their
>> perspective.
>
> That's exactly right. I'm good using REPL for simple scripting, but I
> can't think of a good way to use it for bigger things. Could you point
> me (us) out some reading on how to use it for serious development?

A big project is just a ton of little projects, once you chop it up.
Test driven development is all about that, I think.

James Edward G. II
Helder R. (Guest)
on 2007-01-22 13:55
(Received via mailing list)
James Edward G. II wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Helder R. wrote:
>
> A big project is just a ton of little projects, once you chop it up.
> Test driven development is all about that, I think.

Yes, but sometimes you can't chop it up so fine-grained that you have
self-contained, one-lined commands (that's what I meant by
'scripting').

Say you write up a method and want to correct it, you have retype or
find through the history by pressing "Up" all the lines that "worked"
and re-entering them. You also can't just read them from a file either,
AFAIK (not smthg like an incomplete method code, for instance).

Conversely, it's not trivial to go through the lines that "worked" in
that awkward "Up"-key fashion, then select them and save them out to a
file.

Those are the questions Jonathan A. pointed out, and I don't have
good answers for them.

Perhaps there's some different mode in irb where you can quickly
inspect the aggregated command history as in a regular editor and
choose to append selected lines out to a file? That'd be very helpful,
especially with the ability to load them back as if you had typed them
in yourself, which would allow for loading of incomplete blocks of
code.
Randy K. (Guest)
on 2007-01-22 15:46
(Received via mailing list)
On Monday 22 January 2007 06:48 am, Helder R. wrote:
> good answers for them.
>
> Perhaps there's some different mode in irb where you can quickly
> inspect the aggregated command history as in a regular editor and
> choose to append selected lines out to a file? That'd be very helpful,
> especially with the ability to load them back as if you had typed them
> in yourself, which would allow for loading of incomplete blocks of
> code.

I am not a very experienced Ruby programmer, but what I find helps in
that
regard is that I do my irb work in a kde konsole.  It displays all the
old
lines that I've entered  (and results) with its "History" feature.  I
then
use Linux style copy (select then paste with middle mouse button) to
grab the
lines I want, paste them into my editor, and edit out the stuff I don't
want
(if I've copied more than I want).

Randy K.
James G. (Guest)
on 2007-01-22 15:56
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 22, 2007, at 5:48 AM, Helder R. wrote:

> Yes, but sometimes you can't chop it up so fine-grained that you have
> self-contained, one-lined commands (that's what I meant by
> 'scripting').

I think it's harder for some projects than others, but I'm not
willing to go all the way to "can't".  ;)

> Say you write up a method and want to correct it, you have retype or
> find through the history by pressing "Up" all the lines that "worked"
> and re-entering them. You also can't just read them from a file
> either,
> AFAIK (not smthg like an incomplete method code, for instance).
>
> Conversely, it's not trivial to go through the lines that "worked" in
> that awkward "Up"-key fashion, then select them and save them out to a
> file.

Here are some ideas:

 >> def test
 >>   puts "This line is OK."
 >>   puts "So is this one."
 >>   Object.new.no_such_method  # Oops!
 >> end
=> nil
 >> test
This line is OK.
So is this one.
NoMethodError: undefined method `no_such_method' for #<Object:0x102f9ac>
         from (irb):4:in `test'
         from (irb):6
 >> h 6
[0758] def test
[0759]   puts "This line is OK."
[0760]   puts "So is this one."
[0761]   Object.new.no_such_method  # Oops!
[0762] end
[0763] test
[0764] h 6
=> nil
 >> get_lines(758..760) << "puts 'Now this is better.'" << "end"
=> ["def test", "  puts "This line is OK."", "  puts "So is this
one."", "puts 'Now this is better.'", "end"]
 >> eval((get_lines(758..760) << "puts 'Now this is better.'" <<
"end").join("\n"))
=> nil
 >> test
This line is OK.
So is this one.
Now this is better.
=> nil

You can also write to a file:

 >> hw "test_method.rb", 758..760
=> nil
 >> File.read("test_method.rb")
=> "def test\n  puts "This line is OK."\n  puts "So is this one."\n"
 >> File.open("test_method.rb", "a") { |f| f << "  puts 'Fixed in the
file.'\nend\n" }
=> #<File:test_method.rb (closed)>
 >> File.read("test_method.rb")=> "def test\n  puts "This line is
OK."\n  puts "So is this one."\n  puts 'Fixed in the file.'\nend\n"
 >> load "test_method.rb"
=> true
 >> test
This line is OK.
So is this one.
Fixed in the file.
=> nil

The methods I am using here come from:

http://blog.bleything.net/pages/irb_history

Hope that helps.

James Edward G. II
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2007-01-22 17:00
(Received via mailing list)
James Edward G. II wrote:
>
>
Uh ... not really, for a number of reasons. To use the old saw about
nine women not being able to produce a baby in one month, a baby is not
a collection of small separately-developed pieces. A large software
project is a complex adaptive system, interacting with numerous
machines, users, creators and maintainers in many different ways. One
distinguishing characteristic of complex adaptive systems is that they
exhibit behavior that *can't* be explained or predicted by examining
their components. Just like the baby, there are pieces you can remove
that degrade their functioning, pieces like hair and toenails that
return if removed (log files, for example :) ) and pieces you can't
remove without destroying their functioning.

Irb-style "design-at-the-keyboard" doesn't scale beyond a small, "agile"
project. I'm not sure test-driven development or continuous refactoring
do, either, because nobody has ever to my knowledge had the budget to
attempt it -- we're all too busy on the next "complex adaptive software
project that's good enough". :) Irb is *part* of the tool set you need
to work on a complex adaptive Ruby software project. I can't imagine
working on such a project without irb. But if text-based tools are *all*
I'm allowed to work with, I'd seriously question my relationship with
management. :)

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
James G. (Guest)
on 2007-01-22 17:11
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 22, 2007, at 8:59 AM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

> Irb-style "design-at-the-keyboard" doesn't scale beyond a small,
> "agile" project. I'm not sure test-driven development or continuous
> refactoring do, either, because nobody has ever to my knowledge had
> the budget to attempt it

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?
isnumber=36124&arnumber=1717338&count=20&index=7

James Edward G. II
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2007-01-23 05:31
(Received via mailing list)
James Edward G. II wrote:
> James Edward G. II
Thanks!! If I run out of queuing theory papers to buy, I might buy that
one. :) However:

"the coordination and communication grows exponentially with the number
of individual developers and sites. "

That's not correct, either. The formula *involves* exponentials, but the
communication and coordination does not grow exponentially -- nothing
large could be built if it did. I have the formulas somewhere; if I can
find them, I'll post them here.

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
Martin DeMello (Guest)
on 2007-01-23 10:16
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/22/07, Helder R. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> Conversely, it's not trivial to go through the lines that "worked" in
> that awkward "Up"-key fashion, then select them and save them out to a
> file.

It's on the to-do list for fxirb. I already have multiline history
working:

----------------------------------------------------------------
irb(main):001:0> [1,2,3,4,5].each {|a|
irb(main):002:1*   b = a + 2
irb(main):003:1>   puts b
irb(main):004:1>   }
3
4
5
6
7
=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
irb(main):005:0> [1,2,3,4,5].each {|a|
b = a + 2
puts b
  }

----------------------------------------------------------------

all I need to do is add various session and entry save options. Some
sort of mathematica-like system would be nice.

martin
Helder R. (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 01:20
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 22, 11:16 am, Randy K. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> I am not a very experienced Ruby programmer, but what I find helps in that
> regard is that I do my irb work in a kde konsole.  It displays all the old
> lines that I've entered  (and results) with its "History" feature.  I then
> use Linux style copy (select then paste with middle mouse button) to grab the
> lines I want, paste them into my editor, and edit out the stuff I don't want
> (if I've copied more than I want).

Hey, great idea! I'm so used to the default mode using bash that I had
never noticed I could use irb from *inside* konsole. I always ran it
from bash. I'll try that out see how it works!

Thanks a lot!

Helder R.
Helder R. (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 01:25
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 22, 11:55 am, James Edward G. II <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
wrote:
> > either,
>  >> end
> [0760]   puts "So is this one."
> => nil
>  >> File.read("test_method.rb")
> So is this one.
> Fixed in the file.
> => nil
>
> The methods I am using here come from:
>
> http://blog.bleything.net/pages/irb_history
>
> Hope that helps.

Wow, this is awesome! The language is introspective and so is the REPL
=) I'll see how I get along with that.  Thanks a lot!

Helder R.
Randy K. (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 02:26
(Received via mailing list)
On Tuesday 23 January 2007 06:20 pm, Helder R. wrote:
> Hey, great idea! I'm so used to the default mode using bash that I had
> never noticed I could use irb from *inside* konsole. I always ran it
> from bash. I'll try that out see how it works!
>
> Thanks a lot!

You're welcome--hope it helps!

Randy K.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.